AT THE PEAK OF THE INFORMATION AGE, WE’RE UNCLEAR ON THE CONCEPT. AND THE INFORMATION VITAL TO OUR LIFE AND DEATH DECISIONS IS MISSING.

Where did that vital Information go?

The fake economy has pumped trillions out of the real economy. The profits are reinvested, not in improving products or services, but in buying government, gambling in the global market casino, and in corporate media that filters out more than it shows and tells. We’ve been sold a mindset in which citizens are merely consumers, voters are merely viewers, and a “healthy economy” is based on war, waste, fear, false desire and deception.

At the peak of the Information Age,

... expanding and accelerating Information Technologies have reshaped our world and again we are late in considering the unintended consequences. A hundred years into the Information Age, we remain deeply confused about what real information is.

THE RECKONING ...

... will acknowledge that our perceptions, thinking, decisions, and the things that escape our attention, are all parts of an information system. Even the simplest message has to pass through several mental filters, most of them unconscious, before it enters consciousness to be evaluated. We are mostly unaware of world views and assumptions we all hold, that sift and prioritize, ignore or exaggerate every new piece of data.

The Industrial Revolution created a massive impact on the planet. For the moment, Industrial innovation has ceased to be the cutting edge of economic expansion. At the end of the first Industrial Age, we are just beginning to deal with the unintended consequences of carbon driven industry. The development of sustainable technologies will open a new Green Industrial Age.

We can hope we're at the beginning of the "BioCentric" Age, in which we will rebuild the global economy on the "organizing principle" of sustaining life.

Different countries and cultures encounter these transitions in different combinations, in different order and with different impacts. China and India seem to be navigating industrialization and a new information culture simultaneously. Our process of adaptation to new technologies and new "ages" is a powerful form of information because of the deep changes in culture and consciousness that are created.

Information is both simpler and more complex than what we think of when we use the word. It's more complex because it takes so many different forms and is exchanged over so many different media. News, personal communications, TV commentary and fiction, education, facts and stories, hearsay, even music and entertainment: this in an incomplete list of what we think of as information.

It's simpler to think of information as the combined forces of mental and cultural change. Things begin to get clearer when we distinguish data from information, and when we see that information, like thinking, has many levels of complexity, authority and power. For the moment it's important to distinguish "message-based information" from what I call "subtle information," discussed right over there. >>

It is proper to think of perception, your five or six senses, as central to all information processes. It feels like we absorb information directly, as if it is transmitted straight from the culture and environment into our brains. But critical thinking demands that we question assumptions and think twice about what we take for granted as true. All the information that we absorb from the world - education, entertainment, news, gossip and more - has to pass through our senses, as qualities of direct experience, and go through many levels of filtering and interpretation before our brains can process it so our awareness can recognize and use it. All messages appear to us as codes, visual, verbal or auditory, that must be translated and interpreted, often in multiple contexts. Our brains do most of this so fast and automatically, we forget it's happening.

In this category of MESSAGES, we tend to take most seriously those that come from "reliable" sources and "authorities." But remember that critical thinking also means questioning authority.

TIME

The only way we know there is such a "thing" as time, is by noticing and remembering that yesterday was different from today. All information, in its most fundamental, true sense, is a function of time, and is inextricably linked to freedom, creativity, democracy and to our developing levels of consciousness. Information is the dynamic process behind everything we learn and know. But our use of information will remain limited, unless and until we better understand its less visible forms and unwritten rules.

So our goal here is to simplify, clarify, define and distinguish different forms of information.

Complex and pervasive, the entire spectrum of our experience from birth to death, awake and asleep, is a "data array." We filter and absorb, recognize some patterns and miss others, question and examine, accept or reject pieces of messages and bursts of perception. From this field of data, we create and re-shape our knowledge, our self-images and our views of the world. From the meaning we derive, we make decisions and choose different paths through our lives and the world. Through the subtle information we absorb outside of consciousness, we change without understanding how or why.

Embedded in a dense information environment,

we are confronted by some monumental ironies. Immersed in a sea of data, it has become exponentially more difficult to filter, prioritize and gauge the importance and accuracy of individual messages. And much of the information we need to run our lives or change our world is missing from the data array.

Rumsfeld was right. There are things that we don't know that we don't know. It's the nature of blind spots, whether visual, mental or cultural.

Blind spots don't just hide information, they conceal the fact that information is missing.

DIFFERENCE

One flaw in our thinking about information is a confusion about the difference between data and information. Many use the terms interchangeably, except that "data" has a more technical tone. And "difference" itself, as an aspect of cognition, is an essential component of all information. But what IS the difference? It will be spelled out here.

Operating at new levels of both thinking and of information - meta-thinking, meta-information - are essential to managing the crisis we face. This is both a path to and a result of "different thinking."

The "laws" of information were

"discovered" or formulated in the process of breaking enemy codes during WWII. Code breakers devised mathematical formulas and logarithms which then came to define the parameters of message communication and data storage. They have evolved into the programming in every new electronic device, and they are essential to many other technologies. But we don't need to go there.

There are rules that govern the way we recognize, process and use information, and they don't require any math, merely a step back from our learning and thinking processes and an adjusted perspective.

But to be clear, the rules of information are rooted in the evolution of the nervous system, in DNA, in the formation of the infant mind, in our use of language, and in our ability to think critically, creatively and freely.

MESSAGES

Gregory Bateson's ideas about information are really helpful in framing the discussion of both perception and messages as forms of information.

Bateson was an anthropologist, social scientist, educator and thinker in many other fields, a generalist. He was the son of William Bateson, the first person to use the term "genetics" to apply to heredity and evolution. He was the husband of Margaret Mead and the father of Mary Catherine Bateson, a distinguished writer and cultural anthropologist.

To cut to the chase.

Bateson said information is "the difference that makes a difference." Like McLuhan's phrase "the medium is the message," it's a little glib. But great wisdom can be coded in such simple statements.

A PRETTY GOOD FILTER

Bateson explains that data must cross two thresholds to become information. First it must penetrate our perceptual field and capture our attention. It must be noticed as different from the background "data array," different from what we expect, think we know or assume. Too complicated? Not really. Our bodies feed into our nervous systems somewhere between a hundred million and a hundred billion bits of data PER SECOND. (The math is complicated.) Our conscious minds can process only about fifteen bits per second. So, somewhere between our eyes, ears and touch, and our awareness, between our finger tips and a reflex, between our stomachs and our appetite, SOMETHING is filtering out 99.999% of the data array. Only a tiny fraction of the remaining data is "presented" to awareness, for the POSSIBILITY of being recognized.

The implication, barely stated but profound, is that a host of physical characteristics, psychological biases, primitive expectations and active but unconscious assumptions are standing at the threshold of attention, in every one of us every moment of our waking lives, and filtering out most of our sensory perceptions.

ATTENTION

So the first hurdle that data must cross is the threshold of our attention, the door to awareness, the filter of recognition. This process is almost completely unconscious, until we bring consciousness to bear upon it. It's important to notice (there's that threshold) that the speed and complexity of the world we live in makes this first difference all the more tricky to recognize. The speed and density of data, from any combination of sources, will make any little hint of the unexpected less likely to stand out, more likely to be overlooked.

A DECISION

The second difference is a little more obvious. It involves what we usually think of as "thinking." Once something is noticed, recognized as being different from the background and from expectation, once it enters consciousness, we have to compare it to what we know (what we know that we know, believe that we know, assume that we know). And then we have to decide if it's different enough, and "authoritative" enough to change our minds or make us take action. So the second difference is the change it makes in the mind: knowledge, belief, opinion, facts ... or in behavior.

Much that grabs our attention does not change us or make us take action. Some is compared to what we know and dismissed as redundant or irrelevant or wrong. Some simply confirms what we know or believe and is folded in to reinforce the already understood. Some data that penetrates our awareness disagrees with what we know, believe or expect. Even though it may be true and real and important, it may be dismissed because it does not disturb our image of what is possible. And our image of what is possible is always a little narrow, a little out of date.

There are highly complex forces that influence both thresholds, affect both differences. The speed and density of the general data environment will affect what gets through the "attention filter." In technical information theory, the "signal to noise ratio" quantifies the clarity of the signal - message or perception - relative to the "noise" - the distractions in the data environment. Beyond that, a whole set of assumptions and beliefs will affect whether and how we allow the data, once noticed, to enter our "IN-FORM" and change our thinking or our action.

Every perception that pulses through one of our sense organs is subject to the conditions of the "attention filter." Every message, from any kind of source - book, TV, authority, rumor, scientific discovery - is subject to a host of unconscious, psychological forces that determine, NOT whether it is true, but whether it is different, new and believable ... POTENTIALLY true.

It is obviously NOT possible consciously to examine every sensory input. But we do control our attention to a greater or lesser degree in any moment, and can therefore adjust that threshold, at least incrementally.

And we know that it is not possible to evaluate EVERY piece of new data that captures a second of our attention and compare it to everything else we know But we know that we can be a little more curious, questioning, skeptical about our own assumptions and expectations.

An individual cannot change their mind by internal will or from external force, unless that individual can imagine the possibility of thinking differently. Obvious as this seems, it can be the unrecognized difference between open-minded intelligence and mental inertia, in me, in you, and in the culture at large. Way too often we think we have changed our minds, but continue to think and act in the same familiar patterns.

An important key to different thinking is the ability to re-imagine the possible, even within the thinking process itself.

WE ARE MOST DEEPLY “IN-FORMED,” IMPERCEPTIBLY AND UNCON- SCIOUSLY, BY FORCES AND MESSAGES "BENEATH" THE APPARENT CONTENT OF THE DATA.

It is way more than words and pictures.

It embodies the combined forces of change in the mind and in the culture. It works at multiple, simultaneous levels, conscious and unconscious, faster than attention, slower than memory, simpler and more complex than the narrow band of our assumptions.

Powerful information comes in several forms that are not recognizable as messages. Some use data, and some communicate like messages, but they operate outside conscious awareness. A different mental perspective is needed to understand their processes and power. I've coined the term "subtle" for this category because they are subtle, soft, barely perceptible, sneaky, both instant and gradual in their impact. But they are more significant and powerful than "message-based" information, because they fall outside what we usually think of as information, and they either underlie, precede or are hidden from consciousness.

IN A TRUE RECKONING ...

... we will observe that our unconscious fears and desires act as a powerful bias on all incoming information. We will be manipulated by mass media unless and until we learn to identify the buzzwords, loaded images and musical overlays embedded in the advertising that drives the fake economy. We will continue to misuse our powerful technologies until we direct our attention to the gradual, imperceptible but deep changes they impose on the culture, our lives and the planet.

Subtle Information works three different ways, all unconscious.

As infants, it applies to the way we gradually sift our chaotic sensory field, recognize patterns and gradually form mental images and concepts. It also re-shapes minds and societies, gradually or quickly, through the ways we adapt to new technologies. And it includes a variety of "subliminal" or unconscious communications that take place in interpersonal contact, in entertainment, in dreams and particularly in advertising. Let's look at them in reverse order.

ONE:
SUBLIMINAL COMMUNICATION

There is a huge cultural taboo ...

against talking about the power of psychological forces in any context other than personal and interpersonal "problems." And many people still resist any kind of psychological self-questioning. Taboos themselves are examples of unconscious social and cultural prohibitions.

Psychological professionals, public relations consultants and advertisers have been using reliable, provable theories for almost a hundred years to influence public opinion. Psychologists can interpret facial expressions and body language to "read" a person's truthfulness or anxiety. Computers can recognize stress signals in voices that escape our conscious awareness. Eye tracking devices can trace the patterns our eyes follow in scanning video images, far more rapidly and accurately than our conscious minds can notice or remember. These devices prove that our visual attention can shift, focus and register vastly more than enters consciousness. But those theories and practices remain dubious in the public eye. This is in no small part because advertisers in particular don't want us to think or believe that they can influence our unconscious minds.

Like the line in "The Usual Suspects," "The smartest thing the devil ever did was to convince us he doesn't exist."

Several common fallacies protect

the power of subliminal communication from coming under public scrutiny. One stereotype suggests that words or images can flash on the screen for tiny fractions of a second, like "buy Coke" or "popcorn," and that those flashes will influence our appetites. The fact is that film and video frames are too long to have such an affect; we would notice single frames that are different from the surrounding pictures.

But two other facts are important. Many other kinds of psychological tricks can be used, and they are known to penetrate and influence our unconscious minds. They may use emotive "buzzwords," editing, and a whole host of hidden and suggestive images that stimulate our unconscious fears and desires.

Most of us think we understand that advertising is trying to manipulate us, and we believe that that knowledge protects us. "I ignore advertising, it doesn't affect me." But the rule of subliminal messaging says, "If it goes in" ... in other words if we perceive it even unconsciously ... "the influence is absorbed."

STORIES are a key to the unconscious.

We use many different kinds of narratives to explain and remember aspects of our lives, and simply to entertain us. The tensions and attractions that draw us into "stories" are expressions of dynamic psychological forces. From novels to gossip to dreams and histories, but mainly in movies and TV, these forces are at work on our unconscious minds. When properly understood, they give us fascinating insights into the broad power of narratives, but they can also give us a profound vision of how the unconscious mind works, how it influences the conscious mind and how it is influenced by a whole spectrum of cultural forces.

These ideas are elaborated on the "SIKE: A STORY" page.

But now another message from the sponsors:

To cite one telling exampe:. Psychologists, at conventions and in journals, argue about the ethics of using unconscious manipulation on children. Huge sums are invested in conditioning toddlers to become consumers, to shape their tender psyches into self-images based on purchases and possessions. Some psychologists make big bucks from designing the manipulation. Many others argue that this is a profoundly destructive, even evil force, distorting the whole culture toward consumption and waste, skewing fundamental values and making the job of parenting far more difficult and confusing.

But very few psychologists argue the ethics of using the same unconscious manipulations on teenagers, voters and other adult audiences like us.

Only somewhat tongue in cheek, I will argue that television advertisements are the Sistine Ceiling (or the cave paintings, or the grand opera) of the 20th century. They contain and communicate the most emotionally powerful, most condensed, most archetypal and visually stylized, idealized and ideological information anywhere in the culture. And most of the power of TV advertising is rooted in subliminal communication.

TWO:
MEDIUM AS MESSAGE

In one of McLuhan's more intentionally puzzling assertions, he said that electric light was "pure information" without any message. He meant to bring our attention to the fact that new technologies re-shape minds and cultures, outside of awareness, through the ways we adapt to them. Electric light, McLuhan said, brought the sun inside and turned the night into day, and that was only the first of electricity's many revolutionary impacts. More than any single thing that electric light allowed us to accomplish, its overall impact was immeasurably "informative."

Some of this can be traced back to Alfred North Whitehead, who said, "The major (technological) advances in civilization are processes that all but wreck the societies in which they occur."

By saying "the Medium is the Message"

McLuhan directs our attention to this fact: when we adapt our minds, our lives or our culture to a new technology, coal fired power plants or smart phones, the overall impact of the adaptation will be more powerful than any specific or general benefit that the technology gives us. And that impact won't be recognized or understood until well after the adaptation is complete, even to the point of addiction.

For more specific examples jump over to FOOTPRINT.

THREE:
EXFORMATION

We are born with mental capacities beyond our imagination or ability to measure. Sadly, as we grow, the gaps in our cognitive skills also escape our awareness. But let's stick with the good news. Even the most advanced cognitive scientists continue to discover amazingly subtle mental powers, in younger and younger infants.

We come into the world with skills for pattern recognition, association and fundamental contextual learning that border on the miraculous. Without any cultural preparation, with only the nurture of loving and attentive parents and our senses, we negotiate a sensory chaos and gradually develop memories, symbolic connections, a basic world view, self-image and a set of assumptions that we will use throughout our lives. We bring ourselves into the first stages of language learning mostly through intuitive applications of observation, recognition and imitation.

Two important thinkers help to clarify the nature and importance of this process. The philosopher Hubert Dreyfus has been a vocal critic of the promises of Artificial Intelligence, asserting that no computer will ever rival human intelligence unless and until it can program itself through the six senses of a living organism. Tor Norretranders, in his book The User Illusion, calls this process "Exformation," placing it in the context of general information theory. He defines the infant's process of pattern recognition in terms of the huge quantity of data that must be experienced and then "thrown away" or forgotten before any sense of order or organization is formed. Estimates vary. But there is a ratio similar to the relationship between all the data our senses perceive and the data that is admitted to consciousness.

Infants, Norretranders tells us, must experience hundreds of millions of little pieces of sense data before they can begin to form the simplest of mental images or ideas. They ... we, have to develop processes of filtering perception and organizing it through pattern recognition. Like our early aptitude for learning language, we come born with many of these skills. But it still represents a monumental filtering process. When you think about those ratios - mountains of data reduced to meaningful bits - you can imagine that this process starts before the moment of birth and progresses rapidly, continuing through the first weeks of life, and into the phase of language learning.

This vision of early learning is enormously helpful in giving us perspective and a context for imagining how we form our most fundamental assumptions and expectations about the world we are entering.

I'm convinced that most of this process is invisible and inaccessible to our memory, because it all happens before we begin to learn language, and that is because language helps to format the mind and memory. The process of filtering "exformation" to create the building blocks of information, it is only logical to assume, must precede language. We have to have a basic SENSE of how the world works experientially before we can add on the cognitive layer of language, association, symbolism, metaphor and the rest. Don't you think?

The critical conclusion is that most of what we know about the world is embedded in our experience and organic memory, beneath the levels of language, logic and symbolic memory. Bateson spent a lot of time with new students, forcing them to examine and discover the sources of stuff that they "just know" without knowing how they know it.